| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Multi-tenancy with RLS |
| Date: | 2016-02-09 21:37:24 |
| Message-ID: | 56BA5C14.6050007@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/09/2016 01:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Maybe we need to restrict that somehow, or maybe some better solution
> exists that we've not thought of yet. But in its current state, RLS
> is at least as much a security hazard as it is a security aid.
> I do not want to see it extended in ways that make pg_dump unsafe to
> use.
Ok, I can see that. Maybe we should have a specific GRANT for CREATE
POLICY which is distinct from the privilege to CREATE TABLE?
Joe
--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-02-09 21:40:54 | Re: Multi-tenancy with RLS |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-02-09 21:34:48 | Re: Multi-tenancy with RLS |